Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Gospel of John shows our Lord to be Mary's only child
konway87 Wrote:These are the brothers of Jesus that are listed in Gospels - Joses, Jude, James the less, and Simon. As you know, they are not actually "Brothers." Aramaic word for Brother can also mean Cousin. They (Joses, Jude, James the less, Simon) are the sons of Qalyopa (Brother of Joseph) and Maryam (another Mary). On Mother's side of Jesus, we have James and John (the sons of Zebedee and Salome). If Maryam had children other than Jesus, then don't you think Gospels would have mentioned it?

Its true that John was the favorite disciple of Jesus. That is certainly a major reason. But I also thought that Jesus told John to look after Maryam, because John was a relative of Jesus. Isn't it important in Aramaic tradition that a close relative must look after his/her things if he/she dies? It must also be noted that this is the only time (John 19:25) where Salome is revealed as Sister/Cousin of Maryam (Mother of Jesus).
First off, whether or not John actually was the beloved disciple is a matter of opinion itself. i am not saying he wasn't (i think he was), i am just saying that i wouldn't base my argument on disputed facts without at least a basic apologetic compass. There are many that suppose the beloved to be one of the "brothers". i understand a brother should take care of the mother according to tradition, but if what happened was nothing special and simple traditional behaviour, then why waste scripture on it? After all, Jesus never tried to stay in line. It could have been Jesus regarded John more qualified (as he was more his brother than his real brothers, check Mt. 12:50, or as he was closer to him), or his brothers being otherwise occupied, or just because he liked the beloved disciple, or whatever. It also seems that as long as Jesus was alive he fully had the right to entrust whomever he wants with the care of his mother.

The "cousins" you mentionned may in fact be cousins, but the primary meaning of "brother" is "brother", the secondary meaning "cousin" should only be applied if there is a reason to doubt the primary meaning applies (and assuming one possible meaning the only possibility is a sure source of false doctrine, semantics 101 mind you). In your case, that is the family tree fragment which you provided. Unfortunately, that information is not part of the Bible, and immediately one must wonder why did the Bible not mention these rather important, or at least interesting facts, and where did they come from. i do not trust your family tree, especially in the light of the history of the aforementionned Desposyni (relatives of the human nature of Christ, e.g. descendants of his half brothers), which were hunted and killed by the roman faith. It is only logical to conclude that the enemies of the Desposyni had an interest to claim that Jesus had no relatives, or half brothers, and that the Desposyni are frauds. That is why the RC (and some orthodox churches) are so firmly standing on Mary's eternal virginity and such.

konway87 Wrote:I know what you mean. I guess this subject depends upon the beliefs of each person. Since Gospels don't mention it, I don't think Mary had other children. But this belief only applies to myself, because its a personal belief. I myself like to stay completely faithful to the Gospel. I feel that if I believe Mary had other children, then its like adding Pericope de adultera to the Gospels.
What the Bible does mention is this:
Mat 12:46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
Mat 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
It is no proof, but a indication: Why would Mary be with Jesus' cousins and demand to speak with him? It makes much more sense if they were his brothers.

Edit: i totally forgot to make my point here: If this means "cousin", did Jesus also mean "cousin" in vs. 48-50? that would have major implications,asthat would mean wherever the NT says we are his siblings, it actually means cousins. Are you sure about this? Maybe when the Bible says God is our father it actually meant Grandfather? :-)

Mat 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
This, however, is abundantly clear: Joseph was Mary's husband. That kind of relationship never set any boundaries on sexual intercourse. In fact, the Angel encouraged Joseph to take Mary to be his wife. If Joseph was to keep away from her, shouldn't he have gotten a memo? After all, at the foundation the jewish marriage is pretty much a sexual contract. Jesus was still considered to be Joseph's son at 30 years, supporting that their relationship never made anyone think Joseph was the eunuchical caretaker of the "holy mother of God" or anything other than a regular husband.

From a biblical viewpoint, i certainly believe the angel's words promoting marriage are a heavier proof than impropable semantics based on the fictional family tree of Jesus' extended family.

i do believe she was a virgin before she begat Christ, but i also think this was primarily to underline that he was God's Son (and not Joseph's), and God could as well have used a married woman. After all, he is not bound by some people's fictional rules for how incarnation has to transpire. He can do it any way he likes.

If he had brothers, the Bible would say so. It does. If Joseph was Mary's real husband, it'd say so. It does.

Messages In This Thread
[No subject] - by Paul Younan - 04-18-2011, 03:11 PM
Re: - by distazo - 04-18-2011, 08:17 PM
[No subject] - by Paul Younan - 04-19-2011, 08:59 PM
Re: - by Burning one - 04-19-2011, 09:51 PM
[No subject] - by Paul Younan - 04-19-2011, 10:07 PM
Re: Gospel of John shows our Lord to be Mary's only child - by Andrej - 04-25-2011, 12:03 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)